genderheretic:

nextyearsgirl:

glowcloud:

laina:

laina:

laina:

this guy was watching the vmas with me and now he’s educating himself how precious is that

he keeps asking me all these questions about aspects of feminism and he’s like “so basically it’s about letting women do what they want without being judged for it” and I was like yea and he was like “oh okay that’s so simple why isn’t everyone a feminist” it’s precious

update: I banged him

Liberal feminism: man googles the word feminism after seeing it on television, I am so impressed by this that I must fuck him + blog about it

This is the most embarrassing thing I have ever seen.

'its about letting women do whatever they want'…i do not blame the op for being brainwashed by liberal feminism bc myself and others were there too, and we are so used to being dehumanized by males that i understand her idealization of this dude as an impulsive reaction, but, god. this is usually the end game of liberal feminism. male placation. depoliticization and reducing the substance of feminism into individual frivolities. no paradigm shift, no dissent. it’s entirely acceptable to the common misogynist if you frame it in a non threatening depoliticized way. and this is what pop feminism is doing and with it, its transformative revolutionary potential is lost. males whose privilege comes at the expense of the subordination of the female class will never embrace the hierarchy being toppled and women realizing freedom from male supremacy’s constraints. these people are framing feminism in a way that is non threatening to the established social order that is the very reason for feminism (male supremacy, sex based oppression, white supremacy, capitalism, etc). it is so damaging to the movement and weve got more and more young girls buying into pop liberal feminism every day, duped into thinking that that is the height of revolution, simply reframing your oppression as empowering (really seems like a coping mechanism). feminism is not a commodity, its not a subjective concept, its supposed to threaten the established social order and seeks to ensure liberation and freedom from social hierarchies that specifically affect the female sex. it will not be palatable to the average person (males, hets, whites, upper class) who is invested in these systems.

genderheretic:

nextyearsgirl:

glowcloud:

laina:

laina:

laina:

this guy was watching the vmas with me and now he’s educating himself how precious is that

he keeps asking me all these questions about aspects of feminism and he’s like “so basically it’s about letting women do what they want without being judged for it” and I was like yea and he was like “oh okay that’s so simple why isn’t everyone a feminist” it’s precious

update: I banged him

Liberal feminism: man googles the word feminism after seeing it on television, I am so impressed by this that I must fuck him + blog about it

This is the most embarrassing thing I have ever seen.

'its about letting women do whatever they want'

i do not blame the op for being brainwashed by liberal feminism bc myself and others were there too, and we are so used to being dehumanized by males that i understand her idealization of this dude as an impulsive reaction, but, god. this is usually the end game of liberal feminism. male placation. depoliticization and reducing the substance of feminism into individual frivolities. no paradigm shift, no dissent. it’s entirely acceptable to the common misogynist if you frame it in a non threatening depoliticized way. and this is what pop feminism is doing and with it, its transformative revolutionary potential is lost. males whose privilege comes at the expense of the subordination of the female class will never embrace the hierarchy being toppled and women realizing freedom from male supremacy’s constraints. these people are framing feminism in a way that is non threatening to the established social order that is the very reason for feminism (male supremacy, sex based oppression, white supremacy, capitalism, etc). it is so damaging to the movement and weve got more and more young girls buying into pop liberal feminism every day, duped into thinking that that is the height of revolution, simply reframing your oppression as empowering (really seems like a coping mechanism). feminism is not a commodity, its not a subjective concept, its supposed to threaten the established social order and seeks to ensure liberation and freedom from social hierarchies that specifically affect the female sex. it will not be palatable to the average person (males, hets, whites, upper class) who is invested in these systems.

Please tag your photos of white men as such. Nobody wanna see it. 

My parents going against my express wishes to not look for rishtas for me is greatly stressing me out. I think I’m starting to have panic attacks because I feel like they will not budge. And that’s it’s only going to get worse in terms of pressure on me from here on as I get older for them. I don’t have many options.

If someone says ‘pedophiles are trash’ and your first instinct is to defend pedophiles, like ~~no they feel bad for it~~, where the hell are your priorities at. Seriously. Reconsider your life

Someone guessed I was 18-19. I’m happy with that.

80s-90s-supermodels:

"Idoles", Vogue France, April 1999Photographer : Herb RittsModel : Alek Wek

80s-90s-supermodels:

"Idoles", Vogue France, April 1999
Photographer : Herb Ritts
Model : Alek Wek

Harper saying missing and murdered Aboriginal women is not a sociological problem. Just wants to treat it as a crime, so no national inquiry.

I hate his face. Loatheeeee him. When’s that kamina gonna die.

what’s this I hear about Laverne Cox supporting a pedophile rapist

Girls learn to love and have sexual feelings in a position of low status, and the eroticization of powerlessness is a normal part of the construction of femininity.

Sheila Jeffreys, Unpacking Queer Politics 

(via sukhsupra)

(Source: yoursocialconstructsareshowing)

Things to understand…

daisydeadhead:

philosophicalnothings:

tonidorsay:

None of this is done to girls *because they have vaginas*. It is done to girls because they are girls. It is done to women because they are women. And the act of saying that it happens to them because they have vaginas is part of the very system of oppression that also oppresses trans women: the patriarchy, which is what made that call and reinforces that idea.

As Friedrich Engels made clear, even before feminism’s First Wave, women were historically controlled because we are “a means of production”—without women, there are no heirs, and without heirs, no inherited property and wealth.  Women’s reproductive capacity is why we were colonized as property, just as animals, countries, weapons and land was colonized.  Otherwise, we wouldn’t have been important at all; any thing we could do (cooking, cleaning, sewing clothes) could have been done as well by men (and in the military, it was).  The reason women were oppressed was to control our REPRODUCTIVE ABILITIES.  This does not mean all women had these abilities, but women were assumed to have them until proven otherwise.  (In many religious traditions, a woman’s “barren” status was the only acceptable reason for divorce.)

There can be no other logical, rational basis for women’s oppression; unless you think men were just being “mean” or something.  No, it was for a very real, profit-centered reason.  Men without families and heirs could not build empires (or even working farms) and without this centralized, religiously-sanctioned consolidation of the family, the state could not have evolved.  The state then effectively empowered men to be women’s keepers until very very recently in human history.  

THIS is the origin of women’s oppression.  

So yes, women’s oppression is because of vaginas.  Also: uteri, ovaries, ovum and menstrual cycles.  That is just a fact.  This is what got us consigned to the lower class, and our vulnerability during pregnancy and childbirth is historically what kept us weak and dependent on men.  And this is how patriarchy evolved.  

To write “vaginas” (or other female body-parts necessary for baby-making) out of the history of patriarchy and the evolution of the state, is flatly incorrect.  

It is also anti-feminist, since this account effectively erases the one thing women were allowed to do, the one exception to our limitations:   birthing and raising children.  Anything women dared to do, had to be somehow connected to that.  So, the first women artists and writers were women who painted their children’s portraits; sang their kids songs or made up stories and poems for them; knitted/crocheted/sewed their clothes, created pottery for the family to eat on, etc.  Women’s creativity was harshly limited to domesticity like this, and yet, we found ways to express ourselves regardless.  It is a story of SURVIVAL.  To explain to our daughters (as Virginia Woolf did) why there is no female Shakespeare or Chaucer, is to go back to….. VAGINA.  We were only allowed to have babies and failing that, teach or take care of some other woman’s babies.  Period.  

Because yes, that is the historical reason we were oppressed.  BODIES.  VAGINAS.

I do not want to oppress trans women, but I do not want to erase the history of the SOURCE of women’s oppression.   In your comments and in the comments of certain other Tumblr trans women, I see a continuous attempt to do that.  

Why?  

It is deliberately anti-feminist and seeks to erase women’s history.

Just because you don’t like the existence of vaginas, does not mean that you can rearrange history to make them unimportant.  

My feelings about having babies has been very complicated from an early age. I don’t know how to explain it. Growing up I had complicated feelings towards women who became pregnant or had more than one kid. To some degree I had disdain towards them for having kids because I thought that they gave in to men (since I believed that women didn’t choose it for themselves as they would be running after kids, tired by them, and their husbands never helped). To some degree I had remorse for them for the same reason. I also hated men for wanting to have kids but not being involved with them. I despised them for forcing/pressuring women to have kids but not having to give birth themselves. A lot of the negativity I hold towards this topic comes from realizing at a very early age that women just didn’t seem to have much choice in this matter.

Though I don’t have the same thoughts and feelings anymore, I still cringe and get bitter when men talk about how many kids they want to have. Though in their right, I don’t think they have any clue what it feels like to be surrounded with idea at a young age that having kids is a must, a duty, not feeling like you’ll have a choice in the matter, knowing your body will not be your own when you grow into an adult, and fearing this immensely. And then going thorough a process of suppressing these thoughts when you’re older, and talking yourself out of it and making yourself fit the societal mold, because no one will let you be otherwise.

I am too young to be this bitter.